70-200 f2.8... to sell or not?

[Java_Guru]

Well, I have one piece which I'm thinking of selling too...

Has standard UV filter and works perfectly. A little scuffed from usage and manual zoom tight (as all are after some use) but who uses manual zoom anyways. Optics in excellent condition.

As the others have said, it seldom comes out but when it does, you get keepers nearly all the time. Unfortunately now, my hand has to carry baby....

Drat! Thought I'd ask you to sell it to me! :bsmilie:

 

[sehsuan]

If anyone is that keen to get it, I'd probably sell off the Canon lens bag. Totally not my type at all.

 

[Frijj]

Well, I have one piece which I'm thinking of selling too...

Has standard UV filter and works perfectly. A little scuffed from usage and manual zoom tight (as all are after some use) but who uses manual zoom anyways. Optics in excellent condition.

As the others have said, it seldom comes out but when it does, you get keepers nearly all the time. Unfortunately now, my hand has to carry baby....

I think you mean the focus ring...

Who uses manual zoom? EVERYONE (using an D/SLR)!!!

Or is your 70-200 a one of a kind? Can zoom in and out by pressing buttons on your cam. :bsmilie: :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[Java_Guru]

YA YA...focus ring. U interested a not? Reserve Price < 1700. With collar, without hood (lost). Non original cap.

I think you mean the focus ring...

Who uses manual zoom? EVERYONE (using an D/SLR)!!!

Or is your 70-200 a one of a kind? Can zoom in and out by pressing buttons on your cam. :bsmilie: :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[Frijj]

Nope, not for yours.

Thanks for offering anyway.

 

[wiskiz]

Suddenly... like B & S Section... hahha :sweatsm:
But actually i must say its a nice lens to hav lah... even no IS.. but still works fine.. IS too ex... out of budget and league.. watz more... weighs like 2 elephants...

 

[honda]

have u considered getting a tele prime lens eg 100/2, 135/2.8?
http://lewwl.zoto.com//galleries/singaporephoto

 

[hpi3evo]

I'm rather perplexed...

On one hand.. I like the performance of the lens very much....
but on the other, it weighs like an elephant... a little heavy for usage...

Practicality says should sell... coz no point if dun carry around.. but but... but it is good to use it to take photos esp for lower light situations or fast action wat... SIGH...

how? :bheart:

once u see the photo produce by these len, u will need to think twice, this is the best len
canon had made,and also alot of ppl drooling 4. These len is a keeper. .:thumbsup:

 

[An drew]

have u considered getting a tele prime lens eg 100/2, 135/2.8?
http://lewwl.zoto.com//galleries/singaporephoto

Actually there is nothing quite like the excellent 70-200/2.8. But if weight is a problem for you then you might want to consider prime lenses, of course you will lose the benefit of a zoom.

Lenses to consider are:85mm(1.2/1.8), 100mm(2), 135mm(2.8/2), 200mm(2.8).

While the 70-200/2.8 is extremely versatile and really irreplaceable, the benefits of primes are:
1. lighter weight
2. cheaper
3. usually acquire focus faster, but not always
4. usually sharper, marginal?
5. bigger apertures, f1.2 to f2. except for the 135/2.8 and 200L
6. better bokeh (?)

The problem is of course you can't change focal length midway and you have to be quite sure on which focal length you need the most, even then you might miss some shots. Also these primes do not have IS.

Tough decision

 

[dfstan]

are u crazy?

 

[jsbn]

I'm rather perplexed...

On one hand.. I like the performance of the lens very much....
but on the other, it weighs like an elephant... a little heavy for usage...

Practicality says should sell... coz no point if dun carry around.. but but... but it is good to use it to take photos esp for lower light situations or fast action wat... SIGH...

how? :bheart:

Well, I've got a question for u.

"How often do u utilise it enough to justify its mere existence in ur dry cabinet?"

Once u'd answered that question, u'll decide whether to sell it or not. 70-200 f/2.8, very nice glass. Everyone knows that. But nice is useless when its sitting there like a vase and not used enough to justify its existence in ur photography life.

Buy what u need to shoot the things you want... unless u're too rich, u might wanna sponsor me some wides instead. :thumbsup:

 

[The Oracle]

it depend on what you are taking. if you are taking sport, i prefer the is version. However, if you are taking portrait purposes, i think non is is enough. 70-200 is well reputated to have good image quality like prime lenses. so it is no wish to sell away if you are upgrading to is version :bsmilie:

 

[Kit]

Isn't it obvious?? If its too much weight, you probably won't use it that often. If you don't use it that often, what performance would there be to talk about??

 

[rokieto]

I just though this is a much coverted dream lense for many photogs (at least for me). I would keep it:

use haversack type of camera bag to distribute the weight on your shoulders.
use it more often, e.g. street candids, etc.
use monopod for prolong use (better mobility / event shoot)
buy additional light-weight tele-lense for more mobile trips / activities. (if got the budget)

unless you like to go for other options:
replace it with other lighter tele-lense - EF75-300 IS, EF70-300 DO
stop using tele-lense & use the $ for better standard lense / ultra-wides / prime-lenses, accessories, etc.

I once thought of having a all-in-one lense, becos of the weight....but quality of the pics should have more priority over weight. Ask yourself, are you willing to compromise that?

just my 2cents of opinion.

 

[wiskiz]

Haha.. initially thought of selling the lens to get a 18-200 tamron..
But in the end.. got the 18-200 tamron, keep the 70-200 2.8 canon.. AND decided to get a monopod...
My mom thinks i'm mad... ask me how come i'm not like normal girls who spend on clothes..

:bsmilie:

 

[Zplus]

Haha.. initially thought of selling the lens to get a 18-200 tamron..
But in the end.. got the 18-200 tamron, keep the 70-200 2.8 canon.. AND decided to get a monopod...
My mom thinks i'm mad... ask me how come i'm not like normal girls who spend on clothes..

:bsmilie:

Becoz you are a photographer... who shoots other girls who spend on clothes...:bsmilie:
Its a good lens to keep.... I almost bought it off you the last time...

 

[nottipiglet]

Very simple. Usually, the answer lies in the portfolio. Show us some pictures and the answer will become clear.

 

[jsbn]

Haha.. initially thought of selling the lens to get a 18-200 tamron..
But in the end.. got the 18-200 tamron, keep the 70-200 2.8 canon.. AND decided to get a monopod...
My mom thinks i'm mad... ask me how come i'm not like normal girls who spend on clothes..

:bsmilie:

Got the 18-200? Sell the 70-200 den.

What's the use of performance, good glass when u rarely utilise it or finds it too heavy for u to handle? :dunno:

A little OT, the difference between a girl and a guy are juz 2 physical attributes on the body. What exactly defines a 'normal girl' anyway? :dunno:

 

[mephesto]

Well, besides the physiological differences (size, muscle tone, genitalia etc), there are many differences between the way men and women think and behave. This is another topic discussed countless times - even more than N vs C - *GASP* (Oh the horror! I can see some in this forum screaming sacrilege - how can anything in this world be more important than the eternal question of which brand is better... heh heh), spawning the whole series of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" books.

 

[dennislim]

haa ... from talking about lens ... to now comparision on men n women lolz ...